report on groundwater exploration€¦ · report on groundwater exploration at mulga rock prospect,...

This report was reformatted by Energy and Minerals Australia Limited in 2013 from a scan of the original report

R E P O R T O N G R O U N D W A T E R E X P L O R A T I O N

A T M U L G A R O C K P R O S P E C T , 1 9 8 5

F O R P N C E X P L O R A T I O N ( A U S T R A L I A ) P T Y L T D

F E B R U A R Y 1 9 8 6

GROUNDWATER RESOURCE CONSULTANTS 273 STIRLING STREET, PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Report on Groundwater Exploration at Mulga Rock Prospect, 1985 | February 1986

Groundwater Resource Consultants Table of Contents

C O N T E N T S

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1

2. TEST‐DRILLING ................................................................................................................................... 2

3. WATER‐QUALITY................................................................................................................................ 3

4. ASSESSMENT OF RESULTS ................................................................................................................. 4

5. GROUNDWATER‐LEVELS, AMBASSADOR AREA ................................................................................. 5

6. ORIGIN OF GROUNDWATER .............................................................................................................. 6

7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................... 8


Groundwater Resource Consultants for PNC Exploration Pty Ltd Page 1

1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N

In late 1984 Groundwater Resource Consultants were commissioned by PNC Exploration (Australia) Pty

Ltd to assess the groundwater resources in the vicinity of the Mulga Rock Uranium Prospect, about

250 km east‐northeast of Kalgoorlie.

A report was submitted to PNC in September 1984, entitled 'Lake Minigwal Uranium Prospect,

Groundwater Study'. A drilling and test pumping programme was recommended with the aim of

establishing a process water‐supply of 2000 tonnes/day, and of assessing the dewatering requirements

for open‐pit mining.

The programme was carried out in November‐December 1984, and the required process‐water supply

was proved. A hydrogeological reconnaissance was made to the north of the prospect, and six sites were

selected for test‐drilling in an attempt to locate potential sources of fresher groundwater, suitable for

treatment to provide a domestic water‐supply of 100 tonnes/day. A report on this work was submitted in

February 1985, entitled ‘Mulga Rock Prospect, Stage 2 Hydrogeological Investigation'.

The six sites were drilled in July 1985 under the supervision of PNC. The results of the drilling are assessed

in this report. Although the required domestic supply has been shown almost certainly to be obtainable

21 km northeast of the PNC camp, closer prospects have not yet been completely tested, and further test‐

drilling of three areas is recommended.

Water‐levels in uncased bores in the area of the Ambassador Deposit, in the eastern part of the prospect,

were measured during 1985. The implications of these levels are assessed in this report.

A programme of radioactive dating, although feasible, is not considered warranted at present.



2 . T E S T ‐ D R I L L I N G

The six sites were drilled by reverse‐circulation, mainly using air, but with the addition of water where

necessary.

Details of all bores, as supplied by PNC, and shown on Table 1 below:

Table 1 Borehole Details

Borehole No.

Reduced Level (m)

Total Depth (m)

Depth toBasement

(m)

Water Level (m)

Salinitymg/L TDS

Airlift Yield

Drilling Water Used Casing

1327 353.6 71 49.2 63.7 ‐ Nil No Nil

1328 359.0 65 40.0 57.4 ‐ Nil Yes Cased to Total Depth

1329 349.2 77 73.5 60.5 39,700 Small Yes Cased to Total Depth

1330 323.3 101 99.2 ‐ 57,160 Small Yes Cased to Total Depth

1331 331.4 59 38.5 ‐ 6,909 13m3/day Yes Cased to Total Depth

1332 ~326 53 35.0 22.8 1,390 21m3/day No Cased to Total Depth

Water‐levels were not recorded in Bores 1330 and 1331.



3 . W A T E R ‐ Q U A L I T Y

Samples of groundwater were submitted for analysis from bores 1329, 1330, 1331 and 1332, and from

three other uranium exploration bores in the vicinity of site 1330.

The results are given in Table 2 below:

Table 2 Chemical Analyses of Groundwater, 1985 Drilling Programme

Bore

No. pH

Milligrammes per Litre Sum of

Conductive

Ions Remarks Na K Ca Mg Cl HCO3 SO4 NO3

Soluble

Fe

1329 7.9 12350 250 710 1200 21160 165.9 3870 12.3 <0.05 39718 Composite depth sample

1330 7.0 17600 450 985 1700 30100 31.7 6285 8.6 <0.05 57160 101m depth

1331 7.8 2060 105 117 180 3266 80.5 1100 3.0 <0.05 6912 59m depth

1332 6.8 392 32 26 43 653 9.8 235 4.4 <0.05 1395 53m depth

1346 5.5 7100 225 432 725 11640 6.1 2665 6.1 <0.05 22799 87m depth

1347 7.0 8100 250 447 800 13630 97.6 2925 5.8 <0.05 26255 41m depth

1351 4.4 13600 245 760 1350 22440 <0.6 4455 6.1 <0.05 42856 87m depth

Analyst: Analabs



4 . A S S E S S M E N T O F R E S U L T S

The results from site 1332, next to the pre‐existing BP Bore, have confirmed that this area, about 21 km

northeast of the PNC camp, should be capable of supplying the required domestic supply of 100 m3/day,

without further treatment of the water.

The measured airlift yield of 21 m3/day could almost certainly be increased by a factor of at least 2 or 3 by

pumping from a properly constructed production bore. Yields measured by airlifting through reverse‐

circulation drilling‐rods are unreliable: for example, although the yield of 21 m3/day was airlifted from a

saturated thickness of 12m of poorly sorted clayey sand in Bore 1332, only a very small intermittent yield

was obtained from a saturated thickness of 13m of clean, well‐sorted sand in Bore 1329.

Site 1331 yielded an appreciable supply of brackish water from a 2m thick layer of silty medium‐grained

sand overlying Permian basement. The area between this bore and site 1332, 4km to the northeast,

warrants further exploratory drilling in the hope of obtaining a fresh groundwater supply slightly nearer to

the PNC camp. Two sites for exploratory drilling are shown on Figure 1.

At sites 1327 and 1328, the basement was encountered at a shallower depth than the water‐table level,

so that the groundwater yield was negligible. Both these areas warrant further investigation however,

as there may be locations nearby where the bedrock is deeper. Three sites recommended for test‐drilling

are shown on Figure 1, one about 1km west of site 1327, and the other two 3‐3.5km southeast of site

1328.

At sites 1329 and 1330, although thick sequences of saturated Tertiary sediments were encountered, the

water was apparently very saline. The water‐sample taken from Bore 1330 may have been contaminated

by drilling water, as the measured salinity is more than double that of samples from Bores 1346 and 1347

on either side; the samples from Bores 1346 and 1347 were taken at a higher level, however, and may not

have represented the same groundwater zone as that sampled in Bore 1330. No further exploratory

drilling is recommended in the vicinity of these two sites (nos. 1329 and 1330).



5 . G R O U N D W A T E R ‐ L E V E L S , A M B A S S A D O R A R E A

Groundwater levels for the Ambassador area are shown on Figure 2. Levels measured in 1985 are

distinguished from those recorded in previous years; levels are thought to vary little from year to year, as

indicated by past levels measured in successive years in the same borehole.

Although there appears to be a general southward decrease in levels, no meaningful water‐level contours

can be drawn. Most of the levels are measured in uncased boreholes, so it is not certain that they reflect

the same aquifer horizon.



6 . O R I G I N O F G R O U N DW A T E R

The groundwater is contained in a Tertiary palaeochannel infilled with fluviatile‐lacustrine sediments of

Late‐Lower to Middle Eocene age.

In the September 1984 report it was noted that the chemistry of the groundwater was generally similar to

that of seawater, and it was postulated that much of the groundwater may have had a marine origin.

Accordingly water‐samples from production bores 5, 6 and 7 were submitted to CSIRO for oxygen isotope

analysis. The results were communicated to PNC by letter on 25th March 1985, and are documented

below:

Table 3 Oxygen Isotope Analyses

Bore Delta Sample / SMOW 2‐Sigma

5 ‐ 4.063 + 0.018

6 ‐ 2.843 + 0.024

7 ‐ 3.466 + 0.018

7 (Repeat) ‐ 3.673 + 0.029

Analyst: CSIRO

The results are expressed in relation to the SMOW (Standard Mean Ocean Water) standard; the negative

values indicate that the samples are depleted in heavy isotopes compared with ocean water. The 2‐sigma

column lists twice the standard deviation of each of the quoted values.

Meteoric water is depleted in heavy isotopes compared with SMOW, the amount of depletion increasing

with distance from the coast, and with increasing altitude. In arid regions the original heavy isotope

composition of the meteoric water may be enriched by evaporation.

Groundwater generally preserves its original isotope composition unless it is subjected to temperatures

above 60°C. In arid areas the heavy isotopes may be enriched by interaction with minerals in the aquifer,

because the rate of groundwater movement is generally very slow.

The negative values for the samples from Mulga Rock indicate that the groundwater is mainly of meteoric

origin, as all the samples are depleted in heavy isotopes.

The different values may indicate a different age range for recharge from rainfall at each site, or a variable

degree of evaporation at the recharge sites. In any case there is commonly a variation in isotope ratio for

groundwaters in arid regions, because of the irregular and infrequent nature of rainfall events, each of

which may differ in isotope ratio.



The negative values do not preclude the possibility that the groundwater may contain some

palaeoseawater, mixed with younger groundwater of meteoric origin.

The indication that the groundwater is at least partly of meteoric origin is confirmed by water‐level and

salinity differences at Water‐Bore Site No.5, as discussed in the February 1985 report.

Exploration by PNC in 1985 has provided further evidence that the groundwater may also contain a

component of palaeoseawater. Spongolite, and deposits containing marine fossils of probable Late

Eocene age, have been discovered at a general elevation of about R.L. 325m. These deposits would

correlate with the Late Eocene transgression reported by Bunting et a1 (1974).

This suggests that the Tertiary sediments in the palaeochannel, which had been laid down in a fluvio‐

Iacustrine environment in the late‐Lower to Middle Eocene, were subsequently inundated by the sea in

Late Eocene times.

A mixed marine and meteoric origin for the groundwater is therefore probable.

The meteoric component probably could be dated by radioactive methods, either Carbon‐14 or Chloride‐36.

For a meaningful programme to be drawn up for sampling to carry out radioactive dating, accurate

groundwater‐levels would be required, so that groundwater flow‐directions and rates of movement could

be defined in detail. This would require a network of cased monitoring bores to be constructed as water‐

levels from uncased bores do not provide a coherent pattern.

The expense of monitor bore construction, and a comprehensive programme of sampling and analysis, is

not warranted at the present time. Such a programme would be unlikely to add much of practical use to

the present concept of a mixed marine and meteoric origin for the groundwater.



7 . C O N C L U S I O N S A N D R E C O MM E N D A T I O N S

7.1 The domestic requirement of 100 tonnes/day of groundwater should be obtainable from the

vicinity of Bore 1332, about 21 km northeast of the PNC camp.

This water would require no treatment to make it potable.

7.2 There are three other locations where a useful supply of fresh or slightly brackish groundwater

may be obtained nearer to the PNC camp.

Five sites are recommended for exploratory drilling down to Permian or Proterozoic basement;

the sites are shown on Figure 1.

7.3 Water‐samples for chemical analysis should not be taken before a volume of water has been

airlifted from the bore equal to at least five times the volume of water injected during drilling;

this should ensure that the samples are uncontaminated.

7.4 After drilling the exploratory drill‐sites a larger diameter production bore should be drilled and

test pumped at the site which offers the best economic combination of distance, potential supply

and water‐quality.

7.5 The groundwater is probably of mixed marine and meteoric origin. Radioactive dating of the

groundwater is not warranted at present as groundwater flow‐directions and rates of movement

are not sufficiently defined to enable a meaningful sampling programme to be drawn up.

J. C. Barnett

Senior Consultant

February 1986

GRC18



R E F E R E N C E S

BUNTING, J.A., van de GRAAFF, W.J.E. and JACKSON, M.J., 1974

Palaeodrainages and Cainozoic palaeogeography of the Eastern Goldfields, Gibson Desert and Great

Victoria Desert; Annual Report for 1973.

Geological Survey of Western Australia.

LOG AND PROBE SHEET

..r Second

(T.-f) i":;'N, ?r 9

IVol

Dt'by T

Detector

Datel(lggea & Probed

Monitor

Time Constant

Background

%

7 ;: 0 Meters

[>,0, r.E, ED R c.

Vertical ./

Total Depth

Method

Ho!e No,

Core Size

Location

Core Recovery

Hole Angle

i '

"

, ,,, ,,

I, I

I

'T! '

, ,i 1 ,!

c. p, ~.

I , "

"ib<f ,II 1,1 ,

, ,,0, 'i;0,3'

.,

, ,

( ;1 1,0

i@' ( 130

~: (!16 C';~;(ip-G

I: ~

I@ i

i J 0

( fl':"

Rad;oa~tivity Log

! I

i, i I

t i_I,

COunt Rate,co

j I

! !

,,: I

I, ',

~,

, ,

'I' I I

j :

! i J

iI i

I," • , •. ". r'C t, 9,-on~lo

el'jhT,j <..Ja:,/'J

Description

ih<.",~r;/-,~ ,;;',",,,' ~:""'IC-

""cr., ... SQ"~

~ <.1 i",-. coy"""", I

, :"

i

1H,

i"1

,25-1

;;:::- 1-/327

5

200

i

J.

1

300~,

5·

I

100,

5.

"350 ~

1

(Continuation)

'idr~ ido-<.j~ .'F-f,,, ... d~.",di3"'.d f'~"-'>"'~n

(mH,"""<:..nt.

""<'''0-"<'''-iJ5 I" r/"'''S?'l,'-<' L....CC'....,t>1

No grn<"Jwqt~,lrruv-<.-01 ,,..., hale.

c.p. S

I I

I i

I i

, '

~ '! !

I •, ,

c

!, , !

, '

I ,

, ,

, ,! 1

, , !

i

c.p. S

, ,

LOG AND PROBE SHEETMethod

Hole No,

Location

Total Depth

M, v,s, t£ f. C.

6 t.o Meter.::,

DetectorMonitor

Background

Time Constant r SecondHole Angle

Core Size

Core Recovery

Vertical../

%

DateLogged & Probed by

o'j,d7, 19.r..t

E:

c. p...-,

, ,

i i

,, ! r

, ,

, ,

I ', I

,

, ,, ,.

, 1

c,

'.l;:,1

I ,fl

, ,.

I '5' !"" :

o b YI hi ~'''2 '3

I, ~i",

4- {i II 0

( 0

, ~ ( I p

7 ( ?i>, ,

i :

,, !

I:

! i

,: !

COunt Rate

,

I I

II j

I 1I

""~ t-.?;' I :

,. I,

! s--r

, ,

, I

I I

,,

I,

I

, '

I

, ' ,I

1- I ;--; --.,. Ir ! I

I

i,

iI

Description

~. ~ ,'rO e .....rfp .. , ....,,.I~:.!' <:.p1"/ <;,_v.<;,s~.d---'.... ,.'- ]",. ><Ii. ,_',_ ..k: ... -Y"')I ~ /-»

.•. :.~ «(~,'7 ",~", :~"d

...• ,.7_~''''''-':_'''''"'I;-e--_~_. d. t.~.".

V~"Y F<>k p;~~-~)''" _~ s"ndi. C-,~"-,,d --.d t' ,,<

:1:1",1; "~ ...rif/<.

~.=C:-w

'''" -1'I~,·.! s;/;c.ifr~d )n,-"'- c. SCM

. -'-'.

r,',"",

Depth

"1I

i

I,

m ft.

- 1-

-;1: _ /- j:J.J? (Continuation) c.p. ~.p,

c,p. S

,,I,I

•••••••. 'i

I '

I ....•.....

",J I '.i 200J + FIE 7~//~""Sh. brOW,>1 -

I I =7= cra},), V.T. sand

1=----/ :-

oj ! c/',

I :7Gl

,

I,

5j) 250

, ,,

id',Jri~r' I' i/ f.

, '

, ,

I ,, , I

I

i

I"

.l

II,I

.1

,

'I,

I'" 1 1

I 300j

i

'I

llO;

i

, ,

, ,

, ,

i :

2

i , :

, i

, ,

'. '-

LOG AND PROBE SHEETMethod

Hole No,

;~ RC DetectorMonitor

p , !I r02,.

location

Total Depth

CF;:Ir.~~ 8~':L",.

, "I·, pf f..OK

77.0 Meters

Background

rime Constant Second191r!

iLOG/\

byLogged & Probed

Date

--- %

Vertical ./Hole Angle

Core Recovery

Core Size

, ,

, '

M

i ! ;

, ,

I, ,I ,,

, ,

j I i

, I

I ; i

, I

I '

I

, i

, , ,

Ihr-----------R-,"d,C,C,C'C"C';"C'c-L-'-'----------:-:c-----II ' Count Rate c. p,

>"d I I

Description

,

!,lO,

i

I .''.

r/' q><1C. ~\/ c.;-1~;l~;f,-" i.e ,I"",..ui; af "'~

! !

iOFr

i

I,~

"'~"C I(i~rY "',_c ;;a"J

"i;r~d';"bd d"J' c:/,,)J,~,,<'s

-,-

i !

! I

'I

I . . .

..

(Continuation)

rdfr"J - J';'I;~"[;lN/:"~.f.~....,1 ,,,,,,jI,,-ort.J

"IY'7 A,·, .. '11;C,

c.p, c.p.

,~.,

,.

3~O ~

i

!110·,

, ,

, '

,, : i

,

, ,

, ,

II ,

,

, ,

Ii I ;

, ,

I ,

,I !

! I

, ,

LOG AND PROBE SHEETMe thod

Hole No,

locatiorl

Total Depth

D,O, P.D, L.B Rc

:OF-I- 1330f.jLlUt; "DC,:..

A·~,eACS"''''~1".

"tJ! ,0 Meters

DetectorJ\.bnitor

Background

Time Constant S SecondHole A;lgle

Core S:zeCore Recovery

Vertical ./

%

~A.7

Date~e: & Probed by

/0 07. 191?S

:r

, ,

, ,

I I

I

N:!'.

'~

Ib ;

I ,f

, !

, ,

, '

/9,6HI , j

- t, !

51 i. '<-' 2 I, , 3

'n 3' I'it!.;;6 I?5 9,

"2' i

O,3

/,~

I,i;.01

, ,

I vi'

,~

,

I

I i

! '

KD! :1,';;:, ('13Q',C')

til! (i~q\l

I~, (j,'i 0

i'5i! ( 'tb'6',( 1310

~~i;v~10; n· ~'~

I,j' ' SB1 / '1 '

, !

; I

\

Ii

I I J

Radioactivity Log

, ,

:, !

, I

~,

! I

, !

I'

, i

! I !

,.,------, ,

I,

II I, ,

- ,-

Descrip;ion

1'''''''- '..... rw-r. hi9hJ'j"'" ""t~l cJOo.-',j

re.", "",,.,d::; h""-'5nn!

ri-, ,"" '3 h <>vot

150

I5':

10-,

c.p,S,

,,

, I,

-_''1

.-C

c.p,

~f. - 1<Fs·'Ci.. f'J-""I{l

</1', <-I,,:: ) ,o~1< ,f"jl",,..-,.....,.-, , ",...,N" ~_ .. '-

$~::;,J , '--c-'l"r~ ,-I"') ,c,f"C·.).;.,/"), ,-,'~ fa ,P.tw~

'-"'~'"

c v~ s~,,:>', m,""Lo~(.

c!,,':!~ ,lcle,!::" """,,,

(Continuation)

c_ v ,- 9~~'"'~'~"- $~""

<-i~:J~ 'p~,'" S"-<-'::)

~, ':--

250 -

I'--'--'i \'~

P1 .~

i If,

200

'I 300"

i\

5·

,~Oi

5

~.

I.

I

;

:'9·2. !100 -;

!

,

350

I;

110 1,

5 ,,

5~",IJ"';<O~+' </"",pfr"....., .5 i"", ~r""""

ria "o,..',Ac",,,,T":V"""J w,,~ {irw"")-<.--r ~:~.~;,.. p,,~5"

.,,",,~J,,",,,4-.r ",jircr_" . . d'""""'."l(. c",-,J'J~ ,

, ,"T

, , I I

!120 I

I ,

! I

LOG AND PROBE SHEET

1985"

Second ~s

-I( _"-vL\-JQ ob

331·4""

II 7

Detector

Datelogged & P robi'd by

Monitor

Background

Time Constant

%

Metho~ : M;:f4€, L.5 RC. DR.Y

Hole No, 0;:--1 ,33 ILoce.. t'~;o:,;------o--C,",CJ u

C,",A:-'~R"OC.u,,:----

Total Depth 5'1-0 Meters

COfe Recovery

Hole Angle Vertical ..,/"

Core Size

! I '

"

I '

i I

c. p.~.

, I, ,

! !

, ~t!

,

I I )

I ;

o ·'t

; J

, D,·

i ; ! I

'I

,,

,~ I

: I I I

,, ,iI

2

, ,

i !

i! ,

,

, i I

I

; I I

, i

; i

, I

, I

! !

, I

Count Rate

""

Radioactivity Log

, ,

S b'+lb>1..3bo"'p NG

, '

, -

,r

D~scription

"

O'F-I- 1331

I~ ,, :

,[1

\c.p. ~.(Ccntinuation)

I 2004

I

I

I

;

, i

\ , \

I250 1,,

, ,, ,

, ,

I~i

I

I;1

90iI I

300'1

, ,, ,

,, I

i !

, i

, '

, ,

I Ii I

;'i ,,,]

I 1,

;,

I1001 i

110,,,

;1I

,~I

! "

, '

I,

I

i !! ;

2

LOG AND PROBE SHEET

Of'-j- 1332

.) Second.:::

':c. 1985Date

DetectorMonitor

Time Constant

Background

./Meler55'3.0

: Vertical

Total DepthLocation

Hole No,

Hole Angle

Method

Core Size

Core Recovery %

Logged & Probed by k· "'FLiLwoob

, I

I i

I ,

, ,I

, ,

I, I

"'i • "'i

I i

, I, I

, i

IV ,

I i-

, ,

iL

c. P.5.

Iii I

I

, ,

, ,

, ,

I '

,i ! ; ,r

z "

i ! L :

-! , !

i !

I I

, ,,

I I

I I,,

I '

Count Rate"0

Radioactivity Log:

, ,, ,

I i

I I

, I i I

,I

'tJ l-lo-or-ocr ~~', t

,"

, , '

Ii

Description

I

.,I

"11

., ,~

,I

,~,

, 55;~

1 55 '1 55 I

~-'-

~

\

1332 .(390)

* * /1~

/33/ ; t'0(6909) "

{

Mulga Rock Prospect

~.._"'"==,i-.....i!~=ci.j_...;lmONE RES

RECOMMENDEDTEST DRILLING SITES

PNC EXPLORATION (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD

I(31 600) 0

').qO

~/

~90__

".)'<:la7\./(36BOO)

.-" /330 }i(22800). 0 0(26250)

eCCe. .".' / 151/60). . . I

II 0142850)

* * ) "'1001

1\/"':',0 qo!Jj~[

?

EXISTING WATER BORE(TOTAL SALT CONTENT IN BRACKETS)

EX PLORAnON BORE(TOTAL SALT CONTENT IN BRACKETS)

19B5 GROUNDWATER EXPLORATION BORE(TOTAL SALT CONTENT IN BRACKETS)

RECOMMENDED TEST DRILLINGSIT~

(9860)'

• (9860)

30(83800)

0 /321• (/390)

*

50(59 000)30

(83800 )

\ ,

LEGEND

TRACK

SURFACE DRAINAGE

AIRPHOTO TREND(SHALLOW PROTEROZOIC BEDROCK)

CONTOURS ON BASEMENT UNCONFORMITY(ABOVE PERMIAN OR PROTEROZOIC)

/329 J0(39100)

290

3/0 ;;;.--

6o (89 300)

40(69500)

North lme

GROUNDWATER RESOURCE CONSULTANTS FIGURE 545 - 3-1

LEGEND

",-

~~

301'6\<~--------~......-------------------+~----4'---'j+------

'.:

~ .. ~'....

Mulga Rock ProjectAmbassador ArEa

SCALE

2 km

water-Level pre 1985

Woter- Level 1985

Edge of Tertiary Channel( R.L.290m)

Non core hole. 1978

Non core hole. 1979 - 1985

Core hole, 1979-85 (CO prefil

GROUNDWATER LEVELS

,

o

,

r----~---....PNC EXPlORATtON(AUSTRAUA)PTY LTD

.,286·/

0287·1

'~------_\-?iJ ..... 1.4 , ......,.~..

,

-',...'

.--....-

........ \ T .' . './..'~~ ..

.. .: ';::";" ..;1. ~ ." . '. .;iT ......' -K- ~£

.:P' __.-..-t> ..

"_._---

~.~ .. '-- ..

.. ~ ~., .. , .. ~,

'......._--_." '28N - -"'-: .- ,

" f .. • ..

1--.

r..--.-~_..-I-.---e ...-..---"--1--. <=0----

GROUNDWATER RESOURCE CONSULTANTS FIGURE 545 -3-2

report on groundwater exploration€¦ · report on groundwater exploration at mulga rock prospect,...

Documents